Conference taveng::bagels

    No, why should I or any Jew for that matter.  I don't like it when
    people get partisan vis-a-vis religion, it's a display of how religion
    is a large factor in fragmenting the world.  
    
    I don't take any interpretation as the "gospel".  Jesus may not
    have been the messiah, but then how can we accept the idea of G-D
    on simply what we are handed.  To search for what G-D is requires
    a quiet, attentive, and inquisitive mind.
    
    You know this brings to mind the misuse of the word aphikoris, which
    is generally used to describe an athiest.  Far from it, the literal
    translation of aphikoris is one who questions, I vote for more of
    that.
    
    D.C.

    I'm with you, Mike.  It ain't "Old", it's the "Only" Testament!
    I refer to it as the Bible.  There's another tome, called the
    New Testament, which is not part of the Bible. 
    
    But that opens up the can of worms about "common English" uses.
    Like "A.D." and "B.C.", which are nominally offensive.  I much
    prefer "C.E." and "B.C.E." as abbreviations for "the goyische
    calendar year".

    
    
    
    
    
    
    	8-}
    
    

    I've seen the terms "C.E." and "B.C.E." before, but what do they
    stand for?

    						Rob

    C.E. = Common Era
    B.C.E.= Before the Common Era
    
    I remember when these terms were developed during the '50's, I was
    in hebrew school at the time.  Judaism wanted some terms to counter
    B.C. and A.D.
    
    TESTAMENT = according to all dictionaries is a "statement of belief".
    So the Jews have their statement of belief, and the Gentiles have
    their own.  Don't you see how belief is divisive in itself?
    
    I do not rely entirely on the religious element to assert my
    Jewishness, I know that there are other other components such as
    the national and cultural ethos that comprise our identity.

>        TESTAMENT = according to all dictionaries is a "statement of belief".
>   So the Jews have their statement of belief, and the Gentiles have
>   their own.  Don't you see how belief is divisive in itself?

    	What I don't like is the word NEW, not the word
    	TESTAMENT.  If it is as you say, then I would
    	prefer they use the term "Gentile Testament"
    	or "Another Testament".  But I sincerely oppose
    	the use of the term NEW, as in, This one is the
    	NEWEST and BEST one.
    
    	

  
  re: .0
  	
  	How about Testament V1.0 and Testament V1.1 ?
  
  re: .2
  
  	I find the term 'goyische' offensive and divisive. Although
  the literal translation is 'non-Jew' the connotation leaves something
  to be desired.	              
  
  David
  	
  	
  

    re: .7
    
    I have to agree, but not 100%, with David.  Although the term Goy
    is a perfectly legal Hebrew word meaning nation, the slang reference
    "Goyishe" (although in itself a normal Yiddish expression) has been
    used in this culture as a slight derogatory towards gentiles, etc.
    
    Look I don't think that we should go any farther with this discussion,
    for it seems as though were making a mountain out of a molehill.
    Mike, maybe you should direct this question to Pat Robertson, just
    give a call to one of his "prayer counselors" on the 800 # that
    they advertise on the "700 club". 

    
    
    
    
    
    	8-}
    
    
    

    	 Re .6
    
    	 Mike, no need  to worry about terms such as "New or Old 
         Testament". These are Christian terms which are not part of 
         our culture. What is part of our culture is the thirteen 
         articles of perfect faith that are said every morning at 
         morning services. One of these articles says "I believe with 
         perfect faith that there is no Law other than the Law given 
         by G-d to Moses on Mt. Sinai". This Law consists of a written 
         portion, the five Books Of Moses, and the Oral Law. Actually 
         the Oral Law was finally recorded by Moses Mimonides (sp?) 
         about 700 years ago.
    
    	 Re .8
    
    	 David is quite right. The Torah refers many times to goy 
         (nation) and goyim (nations). These references in the Torah 
         are not derogatory. They simply refer to "the other nations 
         of the world". Some times the Jewish nation is referred to as 
         the "Goy Kodesh" or the Holy Nation.
    
				Fred

    
    
    	Sort of like the term Shiktzah, right ?
    
    

    1. I can't see how 'gulus' is a transliteration of the hebrew
    for 'exile'.  There is a kometz (name of vowel) under the gimel
    (name of consonant in question), making it 'golus' or 'galut' depending
    on your choice of pronunciation.
    
    2. Maimonides did not write the oral law.  Rabbi Yehuda Hanassi
    (Judah the Prince) is accepted as being the first person to produce
    a written copy of the oral law, in ~200 C.E., which we know today
    as the Mishnah.  The rest of  'The Oral Law' is the Gemara, 
    compiled and written down by ~600 C.E. The Mishnah
    and Gemara together are known as 'The Talmud'.  Maimonides wrote
    a work called 'The Mishneh Torah' which follows the logical structure
    of the Mishnah, and is a commentary on the oral law.
    
    3. Whether we mean it to be offensive or not, people referred
    to as 'goyim' or 'goyish' by and large *DO* take offense.  That's
    reason enough to not use the term, at least not without a lot of
    qualification.   'Shikseh' is, I think, a different story.  I don't
    know of any non-offensive meaning for shikseh.  Does anyone out
    there know Yiddish well enough to tell me exactly what it means?
    (I KNOW it means non-Jewish woman. I want to know the meaning of
    the root word.)    
    
    4. I don't like the term 'New Testament' being used to dscribe the
    Christian Bible, because it's a propagandistic term, and to accept
    it as meaningful, you have to accept the very large premise that
    it supercedes the 'Old Testament'.   Most people who use the term
    have never considered the actual possibility that a person might
    not accept that premise.  So ignorance is the source of the
    perpetuation of this usage in Christian/Jewish discussions and
    dialogues.   I think it's an uphill battle to make people aware
    of this sensitivity, although not therefore a battle worth abandoning.
    

    No offense intended in the use of "goyische".  Anybody have another
    adjectival form of the word "goy"?  (In Yiddish, of course.)
    Simply to mean "belonging to non-Jews".

    re .12
    >by the way, does anyone know exactly what "shiksa" means
    
     well, i asked the question, so i guess now that i know the answer
    i may as well post it: 
    SHIKSA (or shegetz), is yidishized form of
    Hebrew 'sheketz', meaning, abomination, impure object, detestable
    thing.  See Deut. 7:26 "shaketz teshaktsenu vetaev tetavenu" = "you
    shall utterly *detest* it, and you shall utterly abhor it",  or, 
    Lev. 11:43 "al teshaktsu et nafshotechem bechol sheretz hashoretz"
    =  "you shall not *defile* your souls with teeming creatures" (this
    is the shellfish and creepy-crawly creature-eating prohibition,
    btw) .
    
    So, i think there's no arguing it's not a very nice word.
                                                             
    

    re: .13 how about "wilde chaiye"...

  
  	To all of the replys that enlightened us as to the roots
  of the words 'goy' and 'shagetz' - thank you.
  
  	My concern is the attitude those words foster -
  
  			Us and Them
  
        Sort of like  ' A JEW' or 'A JEWESS'
  
  	They should have been left back in the Ghettos and shtetls
  where they belong.
  
  	Anybody using those divisive and insulting terms should
  refrain from being so indignant when the reverse happens to them.
  
  David
  
  	

    The Hebrew "nochri," stranger or foreigner, may be a good
    replacement for "goy."  It expresses the same idea, without the
    immediate derogatory associations.

    I always had the vague impression that "gentile" was the
    connotation-free equivalent of "goy."  Wrong?
    
    If you don't like "Old" and "New" Testaments (and I can see why
    you might not), try "Hebrew Scriptures" and "Greek Scriptures,"
    a terminology used in some Christian circles and purely descriptive
    in nature, so far as I can see.
    
    Earl Wajenberg

    Earl, (re .18)
    
    Not to put tooooo fine a point on it, I'd say that "gentile" is
    an ok *translation* of the word "goy" -- notice, that the two words
    are not in the same language.  Somehow, gentile isn't such a useful
    *equivalent*, because (I'm sort of thinking out loud here, so correct
    me if I'm being impenetrably obscure) gentile seems really to be
    the opposite of Christian.  I guess that's from the Christian, not
    Jewish viewpoint, but Christian is the majority culture, and we
    can't really go around redefining words that are still in regular
    use.  
    
    I guess from the point of view of a Christian, people can be
    divided into 3 types along the religious axis: {Christian, Jewish
    and gentile}.  Jews are a special case for historical reasons. 
    
    From the Jewish point of view, there are also 3
    or 2 categories along that axis, but the categories are different.  
    They  are {Jewish, goyish} where everyone who isn't a Jew is a goy,
    and it makes no difference whether they're atheists, Unitarians,
    Baptists, Catholics or ancestor-worshippers.  And for highly-educated
    Jews (I'm talking Yeshiva, not Harvard), the categories would be
    {Jewish, idol-worshippers, not-idol-worshippers}.  There's some
    disagreement about where Christians fit in this latter scheme.
    Actually, that's putting it too kindly; some people try to go to
    great lengths to include some Christians as non-idol-worshippers,
    but mostly, it doesn't work, and consensus opinion is that they
    are.  Muslims, of course, are not suspected of being idol-worshippers.
    When I say 'people' above, I'm not talking about the American Jewish
    Community, by the way, but about the writings of Jewish scholars 
    over the last millenium.
    
    About the "Old" and "New" Testaments; you might be interested in
    knowing that the proper Hebrew name for Christian Scripture 
    (a nice complementary term to Hebrew Scriptures, I think) is
    "Brit Hahadasha" which means literally "new covenant" -- a very
    appropriate name, it seems to me, since one way of looking at the
    New Testament is as a rejection of the  covenant God made with Abraham
    and his descendants --please, no baloney about "circumcision of the heart"
    being more important than that of the flesh (ouch)
    and about how it's still the same covenant, only extended to all
    the peoples of the world, not just Abraham's physical descendants.
    Oh yeah, and the rules are different too -- instead of having to obey
    the Law, you have to have faith in Jesus now. Nope, it's just not the same
    treaty anymore.   
    
    A useful Hebrew equivalent for the "Old Testament"
    is "Mikra", which means "text".  "Torah" is a litte more ambiguous,
    as it could definitely include the Talmud, or then again be used
    to refer literally to the Scroll of the Law only (the 5 Books of Moses,
    that is), or even the  vague concept of "teachings of the Jewish
    religion".   
    "Mikra" is uses to refer to the canonized Jewish scriptures exactly,
    which is approximately the "Old Testament".   Well, I think I'm
    out of breath now, so I'll quit.
              

    The Hebrew word "chumash" (five) denotes the five books of Moses
    (Genesis-Deut.).  "Nevi'im" is the books of the Prophets, and
    "Ketuvim" is the Hagiographa (Writings).  The whole is referred
    to by the acronym "TaNaCH."

    I always thought that "gentile" meant "non-Jew" and that most
    Christians (or those who bothered to think about it) realized they
    were gentiles.  So far as I know, this is common Christian usage.
    This is the first meaning of the term listed in my dicitonary, too.
    (Only the Mormons confuse things.  THEY use the term "gentile" to
    mean "non-Mormon."  Must make a nice linguistic confusion for Jews
    living in Salt Lake City.)
    
    "New Covenant" is a Christian catch-phrase too, and in fact it is
    the original meaning of "Testament" in the titles of Old and New
    Testament.  (Like a lot of words, "testament" has drifted in meaning
    over time.)  Certainly most reasonably educated Christians would
    know what was meantif you used the term "new covenant," and they
    might even feel rather flattered.
    
    Earl Wajenberg